Management of malignant left colonic obstruction: is an initial temporary colostomy followed by surgical resection a better option?

Case report: A clinical report of photodynamic neoadjuvant combined with fluorescent laparoscopic localization robotic surgery for the treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer combined with obstruction

The incidence of colorectal cancer is relatively high in our country, with the majority of patients being diagnosed at an advanced stage. For individuals with advanced-stage colorectal cancer, conversion or neoadjuvant therapy is frequently necessitated to facilitate surgical intervention and achieve a curative effect. And about 10% to 30% of colon cancer patients are complicated with intestinal obstruction. Surgical intervention remains the primary treatment for managing intestinal obstructions, albeit with a considerable risk of perioperative mortality and an increased likelihood of postoperative complications. PDT, as a neoadjuvant treatment for colon cancer, can shrink the local tumor and relieve obstruction, and is effective in colon cancer combined with obstruction. Robotic surgery has the advantages of high stability and low trauma, and compared with laparoscopic colon cancer surgery, robotic surgery can achieve better results. Fluorescent laparoscopic clarifies the location and size of the tumor lesion, allowing for greater precision when removing colon cancer lesions in robotic surgery. Therefore, in the treatment of colon cancer, PDT can offer an opportunity for surgery after relieving obstruction in patients with obstructive colon cancer. Additionally, when combined with fluorescent laparoscopic robotic colon cancer surgery, it provides a novel treatment approach for patients with obstructive colon cancer. Preoperative photodynamic neoadjuvant therapy combined with robotic colon cancer surgery has not yet been reported. Here, we report a case of colon cancer with obstruction, preoperative TNM stage was T4N1, and the lesion had caused intestinal stenosis. After four sessions of PDT, the patient's intestinal lumen was unobstructed and the lesion had regressed. After evaluation, fluorescent laparoscopic localization and visualization of lymph nodes combined with robotic colon cancer resection were performed. Postoperative pathology showed that the patient's tumor regression grade was grade 1. The patient's tumor was completely resected with good resection effect. No tumor invasion was found on both sides of the resection margin, and the patient did not relapse after surgery.

Management of left-sided malignant colorectal obstructions with curative intent: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several management options exist for colonic decompression in the setting of malignant large bowel obstruction, including oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and SEMS as a bridge-to-surgery. Consensus has yet to be reached on optimal treatment pathways. The aim of the present study was to perform a network meta-analysis comparing short-term postoperative morbidity and long-term oncologic outcomes between oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction with curative intent.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were systematically searched. Articles were included if they compared two or more of the following in patients presenting with curative left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction: (1) emergent oncologic resection; (2) surgical diversion; and/or (3) SEMS. The primary outcome was overall 90-day postoperative morbidity. Pairwise meta-analyses were performed with inverse variance random effects. Random-effect Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

From 1277 citations, 53 studies with 9493 patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection, 1273 patients undergoing surgical diversion, and 2548 patients undergoing SEMS were included. Network meta-analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in 90-day postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing SEMS compared to urgent oncologic resection (OR0.34, 95%CrI0.01-0.98). Insufficient RCT data pertaining to overall survival (OS) precluded network meta-analysis. Pairwise meta-analysis demonstrated decreased five-year OS for patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection compared to surgical diversion (OR0.44, 95%CI0.28-0.71, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Bridge-to-surgery interventions may offer short- and long-term benefits compared to urgent oncologic resection for malignant colorectal obstruction and should be increasingly considered in this patient population. Further prospective study comparing surgical diversion and SEMS is needed.

Emergency surgery for obstructive splenic flexure colon cancer: results of a multicentric study of the French Surgical Association (AFC)

Management of malignant left-sided colonic obstruction remains challenging and requires a stoma in 40-65% of patients. In those with obstructive splenic flexure colon cancer (OSFCC), a debate still exists regarding the most appropriate surgery. The aim of this muticenter study was to report and compare the different surgical procedures in OSFCC patients with a special focus on operative and histological characteristics and survival outcomes including 12-month stoma-free survival. Between 2000 and 2015, 2325 patients were treated for obstructive colon cancer in centers members of the French National Surgical Association (AFC). Among them, 198 underwent surgery for OSFCC and were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with OSFCC and proximal colonic ischemia or perforation were excluded. Four procedures were performed: decompressing stoma (DS, 39%), splenic flexure colectomy (SFC, 39%), subtotal colectomy (STC, 17%,) and left hemicolectomy (LHC, 5%). All patients treated with LHC underwent a Hartmann's procedure. There was no significant difference between groups for postoperative mortality and morbidity. Hospital stay was significantly longer after DS. The length of the specimen, longitudinal resection margins and number of harvested lymph nodes were significantly higher in the STC group. There was no difference for overall and disease-free survival. Stoma-free survival was significantly lower after LHC (62%) in comparison with the other groups (p < 0.0001). At the end of follow-up, 50% of patients who underwent LHC had a permanent stoma. In OSFCC patients without proximal colonic ischemia or peritonitis, LHC should no longer be recommended due to a high risk of permanent stoma.

Emergency resection or diverting stoma followed by elective resection in patients with colonic obstruction due to locally advanced cancer: a national cohort study

AIM

The aim was to assess long-term prognosis after emergency resection versus primary diverting stoma followed by elective tumour resection.

METHOD

A national-register-based cohort study with retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed. All Swedish patients with non-metastatic obstructive locally advanced colon cancer treated with emergency resection or diverting stoma, followed by an elective resection, between 2007 and 2017 were included. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were used to compare all-cause mortality between patients with emergency resection and elective right- and left-sided resection. The multivariable model was adjusted for year of diagnosis, age at diagnosis, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, tumour location and pN stage.

RESULTS

In all, 751 patients with a tumour in the right colon and 700 patients with a tumour in the left colon were included. Emergency resection was more common in patients with right-sided colon tumours (681/751) than in patients with left-sided colon tumours (483/700). The 5-year overall survival in patients with right-sided tumours was 25% after emergency resection and 46% after diverting stoma followed by elective resection (log-rank test P = 0.001). The corresponding numbers for patients with left-sided colon tumours were 40% and 64% (P < 0.001). Emergency resection was independently associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients with left-sided tumour (hazard ratio 1.63, 95% CI 1.21-2.19) but not in patients with right-sided tumour (hazard ratio 1.21, 95% CI 0.80-1.81).

CONCLUSION

Diverting stoma followed by elective resection is associated with improved survival compared with emergency resection in patients with left-sided colonic obstruction due to locally advanced tumours.

Diversion, resection, or stenting as a bridge to surgery for acute neoplastic left-sided colonic obstruction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of studies with curative intent

INTRODUCTION

The debate on the best surgical management strategy for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction is ongoing. Decompressing colostomy (DC) and stenting as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) are the currently proposed alternative approaches to emergency colectomy (EC). However, the results of a traditional meta-analysis were inconclusive. Therefore, a network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the three approaches for acute left-sided colonic obstruction.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of Embase, PubMed, Google Scholar and the Cochrane library was performed. A traditional meta-analysis and subsequent NMA were conducted.

FINDINGS

A significantly greater number of primary anastomoses were performed in the DC cohort than in the EC and SBTS cohorts. The 90-day mortality rate was significantly lower in the DC cohort than in the EC and SBTS cohorts. Higher costs were associated with the SBTS cohort (by US$2,000) than with the EC cohort. The locoregional recurrence rate was higher for the SBTS cohort than for the EC cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from the first NMA suggests there may be some clinical advantages associated with DC as an alternative approach to the EC and SBTS approaches for adequately selected patients with malignant large bowel obstruction.

Emergency Surgery for Obstructive Colon Cancer in Elderly Patients: Results of a Multicentric Cohort of the French National Surgical Association

BACKGROUND

Although elderly patients constitute most of the patients undergoing surgery for obstructed colon cancer, available data in the literature are very limited.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the management and outcomes of elderly patients treated for obstructed colon cancer.

DESIGN

This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

Between 2000 and 2015, 2325 patients managed for an obstructed colon cancer in member centers of the French National Surgical Association were identified. Data were collected by each center on a voluntary basis after institutional approval. Bowel obstruction was defined clinically and confirmed by imaging.

PATIENTS

Three age groups were defined, including patients <75 years, 75 to 84 years, and ≥85 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Postoperative and oncologic results in elderly patients with an obstructed colon cancer were measured. Relative survival was calculated as the ratio of the overall survival with the survival that would have been expected based on the corresponding general population.

INTERVENTIONS

A total of 302 patients (13%) underwent colonic stent insertion, and 1992 (87%) underwent surgery as emergency procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 2294 patients were analyzed (<75 y, n = 1200 (52%); 75-84 y, n = 650 (28%); and ≥85 y, n = 444 (20%)). Elderly patients were more likely to be women (p < 0.0001), to have proximal colon cancer (p < 0.0001), and to have a higher incidence of comorbidities (p < 0.0001). The use of colonic stent or the type of surgery was identical regardless of age. In patients with resected colon cancer, elderly patients had less stage IV disease (p < 0.0001). The absence of tumor resection (p < 0.0001) and definitive stoma rate increased with age (p < 0.0001). Postoperative mortality and morbidity were significantly higher in elderly patients (p < 0.0001), but surgical morbidity was similar across age groups (p = 0.60). Postoperative morbidity was correlated to the 6-month mortality rate in elderly (p < 0.0001). Overall and disease-free survivals were significantly lower in more elderly patients (p < 0.0001) but relative survival was not (p = 0.09).

LIMITATIONS

It is quite difficult to know how to interpret these data as a whole, given the inherent bias in the study population, lack of ability to stratify by performance status, and long study period duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients have high morbidity with lower survival in the highest age ranges of elderly subgroups. These data should be considered when deciding on an operative approach. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A964.

The type of stoma matters-morbidity in patients with obstructing colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

A loop colostomy may reduce the risk of severe intraabdominal complications in patients with obstructing colorectal cancer compared to an end colostomy. The aim of this study was to relate complications to the type of stoma, and a secondary aim was to evaluate whether the type of colostomy had an impact on time until oncological/surgical treatment.

METHODS

All patients who underwent surgery and received a deviating colostomy due to obstructing colorectal cancer between January 2011 and December 2015 in five Swedish hospitals in Region Västra Götaland were included (n = 289). Patient charts were reviewed retrospectively. Patients alive in the end of 2016 were contacted and were sent a questionnaire including questions about stoma function and health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

Some 289 patients were included; 147 received an end colostomy and 140 a loop colostomy. Two patients were excluded from the analysis due to missing data. There was no difference in complications at 90 days between the two groups, 44% (end colostomy) and 54% (loop colostomy) (odds ratio: 0.83 (95% CI: 0.49; 1.41). Time to start of treatment was similar in both groups. Patients with a loop colostomy had significantly higher stoma-related morbidity with retraction, prolapse, leakage and bandaging problems. No differences in quality of life were found.

CONCLUSION

The hypothesis that a loop colostomy reduced complications could not be confirmed. An end colostomy should be the first choice in these patients particularly in patients who will have their colostomy for the remainder of their life to reduce stoma-related symptoms.

Hartmann's reversal after colonic perforation or anastomosis leakage, is it the same procedure? A retrospective study of 150 patients

PURPOSE

The high morbidity rates reported might influence surgeons' decisions of whether to perform Hartmann's reversal (HR). Our aim was to report the results of HR after "primary" Hartmann's procedure (HP) or in redo surgery for failed anastomosis.

METHODS

All patients operated between 2007 and 2015 were included. Data and postoperative course were obtained from a review of medical records and databases.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty patients (age 60, range (20-91) years, 62% male) were included. Eighty-six patients (57%) were ASA ≥ 2. HP was mostly performed for diverticulitis (29.3%) and anastomotic leakage (24%). HR was possible in 145(97%) patients including six with previous failed attempt. Overall morbidity was 22.7% including 11.7% severe complications (Dindo 3-4). Operative blood loss and Charlson comorbidity index were the only significant risk factor for postoperative pelvic complications (p = 0.03; p = 0.0002, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In a colorectal tertiary center, HR was feasible in 97% with a low morbidity and a 3.4% anastomotic leakage rate.

Should patients With obstructing colorectal cancer have proximal diversion?

BACKGROUND

Up to 20% of patients with colorectal cancer present with obstruction. The goal of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of patients with obstructing colon cancer who underwent resection and primary anastomosis with or without proximal diversion.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Procedure Targeted Colectomy databases from 2012 to 2014 were reviewed. Patients undergoing colorectal resection with or without diverting ostomy for obstructing colorectal cancer were analyzed. Propensity score-matched cohorts of diverted and nondiverted patients were created accounting for patient characteristics. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, and readmission.

RESULTS

There were 2,323 patients (92%) with no proximal diversion and 204 patients (8%) with proximal diversion. In univariate analysis, patients with colorectal resection with diversion were significantly more likely to have any complication (P = .001), sepsis (P = .01), and blood transfusion (P = .001). Diversion patients were also significantly more likely to be readmitted to the hospital within 30 days of the index procedure (P = .02). Proximal diversion was associated with any complication (P = .01), failure to wean off ventilator (P = .05), and longer length of stay (P = .01) in matched cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Proximal diversion in the setting of obstructive colorectal cancer is associated with higher rates of any complication, deep wound infection, sepsis, and readmission. Surgeons who perform a primary anastomosis with diversion for obstructing colorectal cancer should take into account the significant risk for postoperative complications.

[Long-term results of obstructing colonic cancer]

AIM

to compare long-term results after 2 types of stage management of obstructing colonic cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Main group included 105 patients after staged treatment with decompressive colostomy followed by radical surgery at the second stage. Control group consisted of 115 patients after obstructive colonic resection with colostomy as radical intervention at the first stage; the second stage included reconstructive intervention colostomy removal.

RESULTS

Local recurrences were observed in 5.1% and 13.7% in the main and control groups respectively. Distant metastases occurred in 7.1% and 13.7% in both groups respectively. 5-year overall survival was 69.4% and 50.9% in the main and control groups respectively. Recurrence-free sirvival was 65.3% and 48.1% in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Decompressive colostomy and delayed radical surgery with intestinal integrity restoration improve long-term outcomes compared with emergency radical interventions.

Comparison of emergency surgeries for obstructed colonic cancer with elective surgeries: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Colon cancer patients presented with obstruction were known to have worse postoperative morbidity and mortality rates, but conflicting data has been reported in recent years. We aimed to investigate postoperative complication rates, and short and long-term oncological outcomes in patients with colon cancer treated with either emergency surgery due to obstruction or elective surgery.

METHODS

Two hundred fifty two patients were analyzed. Patients presented with obstruction and underwent an emergency surgery, and patients operated under elective circumstances were compared according to their demographic variables, tumor characteristics, and short and long term treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

Distribution of age, gender and comorbidities were similar between both the groups. Need for an end colostomy was significantly higher in obstructed patients (22.7% vs 1.6%, respectively). Obstructed patients were tending to be at an advanced stage. Postoperative morbidity and mortality, and prognosis of colon cancer patients presented with obstruction is worse than patients operated under elective circumstances.

CONCLUSIONS

Colon cancer patients presented with obstruction constitutes more than one quarter of all patients. These patients have significantly higher morbidity and mortality rates. Obstructed colon cancer usually appears at advanced stage. Primary resection and anastomosis is safe in most of the cases.